Java-Client: Report on Gerrit code review

Dear Java-client developers,

I am Enrico, a researcher at the University of Zurich and I am studying how to evaluate the code review process to understand how it could be improved.

I created a tool that analyzes the changes that happen during a review on Gerrit, to measure the effects of code review on code and understand which kinds changes reviewers pay attention to.

For example, are you aware that the majority of the changes happened during a code review in the last year in your project involve documentation issues?

The link contains the report and some questions we would like to ask you about it. The report is designed in a way that you don’t have to answer the questions (if you just want to look at the report), but it would be great if we could know what you think about our tool/report. Answering will take you no more than 5 minutes.

If you have any question about the report or our research, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Thank you very much for your time.

Cheers

@EFregnan thanks for taking the time to analyze some of our repositories!

I’ve been looking through the report, and while it splits up the activity one thing I’m curious: using this data, what would you expect people to take away from this? Did you find anything as part of your research which can be translated to increased or decreased code quality over time? How does this compare to established tools on the market?

I’ll fill out the survey soon so you get some data for your research, but I’d be interested in some of the greater details.

2 Likes

@daschl thank you for your reply and for taking the time to answer our survey.

The idea of our tool is to give a deeper insights on what really happens during the code review process of a project.

Through this insight we aim to help developers, project managers, project owners etc. to achieve a better understanding of the code review process that is currently in place to find possible ways to improve it (if necessary).

For example, if the majority of the changes are styling issues, maybe this could be optimised by introducing a style-checker in the pipeline or improving the style policy of the project.

This is, of course, just an example. Since this tool is still a prototype, one of the goals of the survey is indeed helping us to understand if this information are immediately actionable or not.

@EFregnan that makes sense, thanks for the clarification. Since we are always looking to make our development and review process better, happy to get any input we can. Good luck with your further research and let us know if there is any new insight or input you can draw from our codebases!

Thank you @daschl for your help. I am glad that you were interested in this project and in this kind of information.

My goal is to keep working on this tool to make the information more and more actionable and exploit different sources of information as well. I would be happy to provide further reports on the next versions of the tool, if you are interested in them.

To keep improving my tool, it would be great if more developers could have a look at the report and, if they want, give me feedback to help me understand what already works and what needs to improved in the next "releases"of the tool.

Please drop me a line at fregnan@ifi.uzh.ch for the link to the report. The system flagged my reply as Spam because of the link

P.s. we created a report for JVM-Core as well. If you are interested send me a line again. Sorry about that

Thank you @daschl for your help. I am glad that you were interested in this project and in this kind of information.

My goal is to keep working on this tool to make the information more and more actionable and exploit different sources of information as well. I would be happy to provide further reports on the next versions of the tool, if you are interested in them.

To keep improving my tool, it would be great if more developers could have a look at the report and, if they want, give me feedback to help me understand what already works and what needs to improved in the next "releases"of the tool.

Do you perhaps know somebody else who might be willing to give me some feedback?

Sorry for the almost duplicate answer, but unfortunately my previous answer was flagged as spam.